Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line treatment for chronic hepatitis B in China

Tenofovir amibufenamide: A potential alternative for chronic hepatitis B treatment

Tenofovir amibufenamide (TMF) is a novel prodrug of tenofovir that demonstrates a promising safety and efficacy profile. A recent study by Peng et al compared TMF with tenofovir alafenamide in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. The findings indicated that both medications offer similar efficacy in terms of viral response and alanine aminotransferase normalization. Notably, TMF showed potential advantages in lipid management, as it did not significantly affect cholesterol levels, unlike tenofovir alafenamide. This correspondence highlights the need for further research to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of TMF, its impact on cardiovascular risk, and its use in specific patient populations.

Efficacy of short-term Peg-IFN α-2b treatment in chronic hepatitis B patients with ultra-low HBsAg levels: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Peginterferon alfa-2b (Peg-IFN α-2b) has demonstrated superior efficacy over nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB), particularly among patients with low levels of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). This study aims to determine whether patients with ultra-low HBsAg levels (< 200 IU/mL) can achieve significantly higher clinical cure rates with abbreviated courses of Peg-IFN α-2b therapy.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, CHB patients with HBsAg levels below 200 IU/mL were categorized into a Peg-IFN α-2b group and a control group. The Peg-IFN α-2b group received Peg-IFN α-2b for a minimum of 24 weeks, with the possibility of early discontinuation upon achieving HBsAg clearance, and were followed through week 48. The control group remained untreated for hepatitis B virus (HBV), and was observed for 24 weeks. HBsAg clearance rates were compared between groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were employed to identify factors associated with HBsAg clearance .

RESULTS

By week 24, the HBsAg clearance rate in the Peg-IFN α-2b group was notably 52.1% (38/73), contrasting sharply with the mere 1.3% (1/77) observed in the control group. Within the Peg-IFN α-2b group, a substantial 97.3% (71/73) of patients noted a reduction in HBsAg levels. Besides, the decision to continue or discontinue treatment after the 24-week mark had no significant impact on the HBsAg clearance rate at week 48. Multivariable analysis pinpointed baseline HBsAg levels (OR = 0.984, p = 0.001) and the presence of fatty liver (OR = 5.960, p = 0.033) as independent predictors of HBsAg clearance.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm that a 24-week course of Peg-IFN α-2b yields robust efficacy in CHB patients with ultra-low HBsAg levels. Prolonging treatment beyond the 24-week threshold is deemed unnecessary. Both baseline HBsAg level and the presence of fatty liver emerged as significant predictors for HBsAg clearance.

Additional Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy to Sorafenib Was Cost-Effective for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Major Portal Vein Tumor Thrombosis

Purpose

The combination of sorafenib and hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (SoHAIC) has shown to enhance overall survival rates in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and major portal vein tumor thrombosis (HCC-Vp3-4) compared to sorafenib alone. Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of SoHAIC versus sorafenib for the treatment of HCC-Vp3-4, taking into account the viewpoint of Chinese healthcare payers.

Methods

This pharmacoeconomic study employed a Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of treating HCC-Vp3-4 with SoHAIC in comparison to sorafenib. The patient characteristics were drawn from individuals from the trial conducted between June 2017 and November 2019, with cost and health value data sourced from published literature. The primary outcome measure in this research was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which indicates the additional cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold per QALY was set at $30,492.00. Furthermore, 1-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out to validate the consistency of the results.

Results

In the baseline scenario, sorafenib resulted in 0.42 QALY at a cost of $10,507.89, while SoHAIC generated 1.66 QALY at a cost of $32,971.56. When comparing SoHAIC to sorafenib, the ICER was $18,237.20 per QALY, which was below the WTP threshold per QALY. Furthermore, the 1-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the ICER remained within the WTP threshold despite fluctuations in variables. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, SoHAIC had a 98.8% probability of being cost-effective at the WTP threshold, considering a wide range of parameters.

Conclusion

In this cost-effectiveness evaluation, SoHAIC demonstrated cost-effectiveness over sorafenib for HCC with major portal vein tumor thrombosis, as observed from the perspective of a Chinese payer.

Therapeutic effectiveness analysis of tenofovir alafenamide and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on the treatment for chronic hepatitis B

To explore the therapeutic effectiveness of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) on the treatment for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Retrospectively analyzing 241 cases of chronic hepatitis B patients admitted to our hospital from January 2020 to December 2021, they were divided into a TAF group of 180 cases and a TDF group of 61 cases. The liver function, serum virus markers, clinical efficacy, adverse reactions and cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) analysis of 2 groups were compared. Two groups of patients had no statistically significant difference in the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and total bilirubin (TBIL) before treatment. After treatment, the levels of ALT, AST and TBIL were lower than before treatment in both groups (P < .05), but the inter-group difference was not statistically significant (P > .05). After treatment, Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) conversion rate and Hepatitis B virus DNA (HBV-DNA) conversion rate in the 2 groups had no statistically significant difference. After treatment, the difference in total clinical cure rate between the 2 groups has no statistical significance (P > .05), adverse reactions rate of TAF group was lower than that of TDF group (P < .05). The drug cost median of TAF group was higher than that of TDF (P < .05), but Cost-effectiveness analysis showed the CER of TAF group was similar of TDF group. TAF or TDF therapy can both improve liver function and promote recovery in patients with CHB, achieving the goal of treatment. TAF have more cost but have similar CER to TDF. Moreover, TAF therapy has a higher safety profile.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Tenofovir Alafenamide and Entecavir in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Markov Decision Model

From the perspective of health economics, the evaluation of drug-related cost effectiveness and clinical utility is crucial. We conducted a cost-utility analysis of two first-line drugs, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and entecavir (ETV), in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. We performed inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to match the independent variables between the two treatment groups. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the two treatment groups was simulated using a decision tree with the Markov annual-cycle model. A total of 54 patients treated with TAF and 98 with ETV from January 2016 to December 2020 were enrolled. The total medical cost in the TAF group was NT$76,098 less than that in the ETV group, and TAF demonstrated more effectiveness than ETV by 3.19 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). When the time horizon was set at 30 years, the ICER of the TAF group compared with the ETV group was -NT$23,878 per QALY, suggesting more cost savings for TAF. Additionally, with the application of TAF, over NT$366 million (approximately US$12 million) can be saved annually. TAF demonstrates cheaper medical costs and more favorable clinical QALYs than ETV. To balance health insurance benefits and cost effectiveness, TAF is the optimal treatment for CHB.

Effect of interferon therapy on quality of life in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Interferon therapy is the most effective treatment for achieving clinical cure in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. However, the treatment outcomes of interferon therapy are uncertain, multiple side effects can occur during treatment, and the treatment is expensive. Although these characteristics may affect patients' quality of life, research examining this topic is limited. We used a cross-sectional design to examine 100 CHB patients receiving interferon, 100 receiving nucleoside/nucleotide analogues, and 87 receiving non-antiviral treatment. Characteristic information, the Hepatitis B Quality of Life Instrument, Connor Davidson Resilience Scale, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire were used to collect information. We found that quality of life in the interferon treatment group was higher than that in the non-antiviral treatment and nucleoside/nucleotide analogue treatment groups (p < 0.05). The factors influencing quality of life were resilience, presenteeism, hair loss, and antiviral treatment (p < 0.05). Although interferon therapy has some potential side effects, the results suggested that it did not negatively affect quality of life. Overall, interferon therapy did not have a major impact on CHB patients' daily lives and work.

Combination treatment of pegylated interferon and tenofovir versus tenofovir for people with chronic hepatitis B

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the benefits and harms of pegylated interferon combined with tenofovir versus tenofovir monotherapy in adults with chronic hepatitis B.

Shared-care models are highly effective and cost-effective for managing chronic hepatitis B in China: reinterpreting the primary care and specialty divide

Background

We evaluate the impact and cost-effectiveness of shared primary-specialty chronic hepatitis B (CHB) care models in China.

Methods

We constructed a decision-tree Markov model to simulate hepatitis B virus (HBV) disease progression in a cohort of 100,000 CHB individuals aged ≥18 years over their lifetime (aged 80). We evaluated the population impacts and cost-effectiveness in three scenarios: (1) status quo; (2) shared-care model with HBV testing and routine CHB follow-ups in primary care and antiviral treatment initiation in specialty care; and (3) shared-care model with HBV testing, treatment initiation and routine CHB follow-up in primary care and treatment for predetermined conditions in specialty care. We evaluated from a healthcare provider's perspective with 3% discounting rate and a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 1-time China's GDP.

Findings

Compared with status quo, scenario 2 would result in an incremental cost of US$5.79-132.43m but a net gain of 328-16,993 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and prevention of 39-1935 HBV-related deaths over cohort's lifetime. Scenario 2 was not cost-effective with a WTP of 1-time GDP per capita, but became cost-effective when treatment initiation rate increased to 70%. In contrast, compared with status quo, secnario 3 would save US$144.59-192.93m in investment and achieve a net gain of 23,814-30,476 QALYs and prevention of 3074-3802 HBV-related deaths. Improving HBV antiviral treatment initiation among eligible CHB individuals substantially improved the cost-effectiveness of the shared-care models.

Interpretation

Shared-care models with HBV testing, follow up and referring of predetermined conditions to specialty care at an appropriate time, especially antiviral treatment initiation in primary care, are highly effective and cost-effective in China.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China.